KULRAWAT SINGH Vs. UOI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Striking a balance between discharge of duties as Member of disciplined force and social obligations qua family had always been difficult for the Members of Armed Forces as well Paramilitary Forces. While a long procedure has to be followed for taking leave for attending social obligations, lack of sensitivity on the part of superior officers of forces to take a quick decision on the leave application, sometimes result into a situation in which the writ petitioner found himself when his leave application was neither rejected nor sanctioned to enable him to attend the marriage of his brother-in-law. On the one hand there was a threat of departmental action and disciplinary proceedings for unauthorisedly leaving Todapur Camp. On the other hand his matrimonial life was under threat as his wife had already warned him of serious consequences if he failed to attend the marriage of her brother.

(2.) Caught in the above situation, though with no previous act of indiscipline ever committed by him, after losing hope of leave being sanctioned to him, he decided to leave the Camp to attend the marriage of his brother-in-law perhaps to save his family life and to avoid humiliation to his wife during the marriage ceremonies of his brother-in-law. He himself reported to the Station in the evening of May 26, 2003 and submitted the joining report next day morning on May 27, 2003. He was allowed to join duty but thereafter for the act of gross misconduct and indiscipline, a departmental inquiry under Rule-36 of CISF Rules 2001 was initiated against him. The article of charge framed against the writ petitioner was for deserting Todapur Camp unauthorisedly and without information/permission of the competent authority.

(3.) After considering the statement of PW-I ASI/EXE. C.Ashokan, PW-II HC/GD S.N.Mishra and PW-III INSP./EXE P.P.Bara and that of the charged official, the Enquiry Officer arrived at a conclusion that the charge against the charged official was proved. The findings arrived at by the Enquiry Officer is to the following effect: